Jessie Payne-Rana v. B. Wood, David Pedro, J. White, and C. Schrudder

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Oregon granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment in Jessie Payne-Rana’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 First Amendment retaliation action. The court held that the evidence did not show that Sergeant Wood knew of any protected complaints when he filed a prison misconduct report, and that Payne-Rana presented no viable retaliation claims against the other defendants. The court dismissed the action with prejudice and alternatively concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.

Holdings

1. Sergeant Wood was entitled to summary judgment because the undisputed evidence showed that he did not know of any complaint by Payne-Rana or his mother when he submitted the misconduct report, defeating the causation element of the retaliation claim.
2. Superintendent Pedro and Officers White and Schrudder were entitled to summary judgment because Payne-Rana failed to allege facts showing their personal involvement in a First Amendment retaliation violation.
3. Defendants were independently entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged conduct did not violate Payne-Rana's First Amendment rights, and no reasonable official would have understood submission of the misconduct charge to be unlawful under the circumstances.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the undisputed evidence created a genuine issue of material fact that Sergeant Wood submitted a misconduct report in retaliation for Payne-Rana's protected complaints.
2. Whether Payne-Rana stated or supported a First Amendment retaliation claim against Superintendent Pedro and Officers White and Schrudder.
3. Whether Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.

Disposition

dismissed